Advertisement

Twenty Years of Territorial Cooperation in Inner Scandinavia

  • Erik Hagen
  • Bjørn Terje Andersen
Chapter
Part of the The Urban Book Series book series (UBS)

Abstract

In Inner Scandinavia , a vast urban–rural territory in the southern heartlands of the Scandinavian Peninsula, a number of local border committees were set up with the assistance of the Nordic Council of Ministers in the late 1960s, later supported by bilateral regional cooperation agreements. These provided a fertile seedbed for the first INTERREG A programme in these borderlands, established in 1996 following Sweden’s accession to the European Union (EU). With a substantial increase in funds made available for cross-border activities, and a structural framework introduced by EU regulations, the INTERREG Sweden–Norway programme instantly became an arena attracting talent and creativity from both sides of the border. The organising principles of partnership, multilevel governance, additionality and transparency cemented INTERREG as a small yet green branch among the mix of regional development tools within the EU/EEA (European Economic Area). In assessing the impacts of cross-border cooperation (CBC), attention should be paid to the extent to which the governance structures and the adherent investments of added-up funds contribute to the EU objective of territorial cohesion. Furthermore, it should be acknowledged that INTERREG A programmes alone cannot be expected to counteract larger trends of ongoing centralisation due to their limited economic leverage. However, CBC, as shown by the case of Inner Scandinavia, can perform well in its more targeted mission of reducing border barriers and in promoting long-term development via the effective utilisation of the border regions’ joint resources and capital. As regional and EU political and financial support for CBC have grown over time, the Norwegian Government funds have shown a declining trend since the very start of INTERREG in Scandinavia. In drafting future INTERREG programmes, close attention should be paid to basic partnership governance principles, pointing out exactly where and why CBC becomes part of the European idea, introducing cross-border planning and increasing the levels of transparency and accountability.

Keywords

Cross-Border cooperation Multilevel governance Partnership Accountability Scandinavia 

References

  1. AEBR (2008) Cooperation between European border regions. Review and Perspectives, Nomos, Baden-BadenGoogle Scholar
  2. AEBR (2017) Decentralisation of future INTERREG programmes: operational programmes with Sub-programmes. Discussion Paper. AEBR, 8 June 2017Google Scholar
  3. ARBO (2002) Partnerskap. Den nye universalløsningen. I PLAN nr. 6/2002. UniversitetsforlagetGoogle Scholar
  4. Austvik OG (2002) Internasjonal handel og økonomisk integrasjon. Gyldendal akademisk forlag. ISBN/EAN: 9788200225522Google Scholar
  5. Bachtler J, Martins JL, Wostner P, Zuber P (2017) Towards cohesion Policy 4.0: Structural transformation and inclusive growth. RSA Europe, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  6. Eastern Norway Research Institute (2006) Grenseindeks og Grense-SWOT. Analyser av grenseregionene innenfor EUs Mål 3 Europeisk Territorielt samarbeid 2007–2013 Sverige–Norge programmet. Østlandsforskning og Karlstads Universitet, HamarGoogle Scholar
  7. Eastern Norway Research Institute (2012) EUs 5 mål for 2020 i Indre Skandinavia. ØF-notat 06/2012. Hamar. ISSN 0808-4653Google Scholar
  8. Eastern Norway Research Institute (2013) Grenseindeks og grenseanalyser Interreg Sverige-Norge. Faktaunderlag for ny programsøknad for 2014–2020. ØF-Rapport 07/2013. Hamar. ISBN 978-82-7356-723-9Google Scholar
  9. Eastern Norway Research Institute (2017) Functional territories in Eastern Norway and Western Sweden. Seminar Armagh, Northern Ireland, 16 November 2017Google Scholar
  10. EC (1995) INTERREG II Inre Skandinavia 1995–1999. No FEDER: 95.00.10.016. European Commission, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  11. EC (2001) INTERREG IIIA Sverige–Norge 2000–2006. European Commission, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  12. EC (2006) Rådets forordning (EG) nr. 1083/2006 om allmänna bestemmelser för Europeiska regionala utvecklingsfonden, Europeiska socialfonden och sammanhållningsfonden samt om upphävande av förordning (EG) nr 1260/1999. L 210/25. EU Commission, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  13. EC (2007a) INTERREG Sverige–Norge 2007–2013. CCI: 2007CB163PO016. European Commission. BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  14. EC (2007b) Treaty of the functioning of the European Union “Lisbon Treaty”. European Commission, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  15. EC (2008a) EVALSED – The resource for the evaluation for socio-economic development. European Commission, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  16. EC (2008b) Green paper on territorial cohesion: turning territorial diversity into strength. COM SEC (2008) 2550. European Commission, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  17. EC (2013) Regulation (EU) No. 1299/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on specific provisions for the support from the European Regional Development Fund to the European territorial cooperation goal. Official Journal of the European Union, Art. 7., BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  18. EC (2016) European Territorial Cooperation. Work Package 11. Ex-post evaluation of Cohesion Policy programmes 2007–2013, focusing on the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and the Cohesion Fund (CF). European Commission/ADE. Contract: 2014CE16BAT047, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  19. EFTA (2016) Agreement on the European Economic Area. Official Journal of the European Union, L1 (3 January 1994): 3; and EFTA States’ official gazettes, accessed on 10.11.2017 at http://www.efta.int/media/documents/legal-texts/eea/the-eea-agreement/Main%20Text%20of%20the%20Agreement/EEAagreement.pdf
  20. Hedmark Revisjon IKS (2015) Interreg Sverige-Norge programmet 2007–13 i Hedmark. Hedmark Revisjon IKS, LøtenGoogle Scholar
  21. Medeiros E (2010) The cross-border cooperation between Sweden and Norway – INTERREG-A territorial impacts (1994–2006). INTERREG Sverige-Norge, IGOT–CEG–NEST Report 2010. LisbonGoogle Scholar
  22. Medeiros E (2011) INTERREG-A inner Scandinavia – Cross-border development partnership – Priorities and Achievements (2007–2010). IGOT–CEG–NEST Final Report 2011. LisbonGoogle Scholar
  23. Medeiros E (2013) Territorial perspectives in inner Scandinavia (2014–2020): Barrier effects, territorial capital valorisation, territorial impact assessment, cross border development plan. IGOT–CEG–NEST Final Report 2013. Lisbon. ISBN 978-972-636-240-1Google Scholar
  24. Medeiros E (2014) Is there a new trust in Inner Scandinavia? Evidence from cross-border planning and governance. Geogr Ann B Hum Geogr 96(4):363–386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Medeiros E (2016a) Territorial cohesion: an EU concept. European Journal of Spatial Development, 60. Available from: http://www.nordregio.se/Global/EJSD/Refereed%20articles/refereed60.pdf
  26. Medeiros E (2016b) Territorial impact assessment and public policies: the case of Portugal and the EU. Public Policy Portuguese Journal 1(1):68–76Google Scholar
  27. Medeiros E (2017) Placing European territorial cooperation at the heart of EU cohesion policy. European Structural and Investment Funds Journal 5(3):245–262Google Scholar
  28. Norwegian Government (2012) NOU 2012:2 Utenfor og innenfor. Norges avtaler med EU, Regjeringen, p 2012Google Scholar
  29. Norwegian Government, Ministry of Municipalities and Regions (2006) St. Meld. Nr. 12 (2006–2007). Regionale fortrinn – regional framtid. Regjeringen 2006Google Scholar
  30. NIBR (2005) NOREG I EUROPA – om norsk deltaking i INTERREG-program. NIBR 2005:107. ISBN: 82-7071-542-5Google Scholar
  31. NUTEK (2003) Grenseoverskridende samarbeid har gitt mersmak. Sluttevaluering av Interreg IIA Indre Skandinavia 1995–1999. NUTEK 005-2003. StockholmGoogle Scholar
  32. NUTEK (2004) I brytpunkten mellan två roller. Halvtidsevaluering av Interreg IIIA Sverige–Norge. NUTEK 012-2004. StockholmGoogle Scholar
  33. SN_INT (2013) Interreg Sverige-Norge Programutkast. et grenseoverskridende samarbeidsprogram – for en økonomisk sterk region med et attraktivt livsmiljø, Høringsutkast, 10.07.2013. INTERREG Sweden–Norway, JämtlandGoogle Scholar
  34. Steineke JM (2007) Territorial cooperation – Extending interaction. regional development in the Nordic Countries. Nordregio Report 2007:1. StockholmGoogle Scholar
  35. Veggeland N (2003) Det nye demokratiet – et politisk laboratorium for partnerskap. Norwegian Academic Press. ISBN 82-7634-515-8. OsloGoogle Scholar
  36. Wallis D (2002) Iceland, Norway and Switzerland and the EU: forgotten enlargement?. The Centre for Reform, LondonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Hedmark County CouncilHamarNorway

Personalised recommendations